B bribes C 1.5 million, wins the bid: Referrer A receives a 500k kickback and is sentenced.

Defendant: Wang [M]

In March 2020, Zhan [M], the legal representative of Ningxia [—] Technology Co., Ltd. at the time (handled in a separate case), subcontracted the Ningxia [—] construction project. Through Wang [M], he became acquainted with Li [M] (handled in a separate case), the brother of Li [M] (handled in a separate case), who was the Party secretary and director of the Party leadership group of the Zhongning County Health and Health Bureau at the time, and requested that Li [M] help communicate so that Li [M] would provide assistance for the project to be bid successfully by [—] Software Co., Ltd., with which his company was collaborating.

During this period, Wang [M] introduced Li [M] and Zhan [M] to meet twice. Li [M] agreed, and conveyed this to Li [M]. Later, with the help of Li [M], [—] Software Co., Ltd. successfully won the bid for the above-mentioned project.

In May of the same year, Zhan [M], through Wang [M] and Li [M], gave Li [M] 1.5 million yuan.

In June of the same year, Zhan [M] paid Wang [M] a kickback fee of 0.5 million yuan.

In October 2020, Li [M], through Li [M] and Wang [M], refunded the above 1.5 million yuan to Zhan [M]. At the same time, Wang [M] and Zhan [M] forged paperwork such as IOUs and receipts, fabricating the fact that Wang [M] returned the 0.5 million yuan kickback fee to Zhan [M].

It was also found that Wang [M] returned all illegal proceeds of 0.5 million yuan to the account of the Zhongning County Supervisory Commission. Staff of the Discipline Inspection Commission of the city of Wei’ning and its supervisory investigation commission took Wang [M] from the Zhongning Industrial Park Management Committee to the Wei’ning City Supervisory Detention Center; during the journey, Wang [M] voluntarily confessed the facts of his crimes. Because, on June 25, 2024, the Zhongning County Supervisory Commission, in accordance with law, decided to take him into custody, and on August 1 of the same year, the Zhongning County Supervisory Commission, in accordance with law, decided to解除 the custody measures, he was held in custody for 38 days.

The above facts are supported by witness testimony of Li [M], Li [M], Zhan [M], Chen [M], Ni [M], Cao [M], Xu [M], Sun [M], Feng [M], Jin [M], Lang [M], Liu [M], Wang [M], Wang [M] [—], Li [M], Yang [M], Wang [M] [—], and Zhang [M], which were examined and confirmed during the court hearing, as well as documents including the Zhongning County Supervisory Commission’s problem-line clues acceptance and approval forms, the letter for transferring problem-line clues, the letter regarding notification of problem-line clues related to duty-related violations, the delivery receipt, the letter for transferring problem-line clues, the office disposition report, the clues disposition report and plan, minutes of the meeting, the preliminary verification plan and safety contingency plan, reports on conducting the preliminary verification, the preliminary verification report and meeting minutes, the decision on filing a case, the record of informing, the notice of filing a case, the decision on taking custody, the notice of taking custody, the decision on解除 the custody measures, the request form for seizure, the seizure notice, the seizure inventory, the application for joining the Party, the cadre appointment and removal approval form, the employee work history sheet, the appointment and removal document, the process of surrender, the proof of no violations regarding the Zhongning County XX Bureau, the reply letter from the Discipline Inspection Commission of China Mobile Communications Group Ningxia Co., Ltd., the bidding and procurement materials for the Zhongning [—] project, information on corporate entities from Xi’an and Ningxia [—] Company, information on the corporate entity of Henan [—] Enterprise Management Consulting Co., Ltd., and other materials, the cooperation agreement, supplementary agreement, and agreement between Ningxia [—] Technology Co., Ltd. and [—] Software Co., Ltd., the detailed classification ledger of Ningxia [—] Technology Co., Ltd., the payment application forms, accounting vouchers and attachments, the accounting vouchers and receipts for the prepayment to [—] Software, financial vouchers, transaction details, the cash payment slips of Huaxia Bank, IOUs and receipts, statements of remorse and refund vouchers, the plea and sentencing agreement (admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment), and evidence such as Wang [M]’s statements and basic household registration information, which are sufficient to conclude.

Court judgment

The court held that Wang [M] introduced a unit to bribe national officials with 1.5 million yuan, and the circumstances are serious. His conduct has constituted the crime of introducing bribery, and he should be punished according to law. The allegations made by the prosecution are成立.

The defense counsel’s opinions that, before Wang [M] was prosecuted, he voluntarily confessed the facts of his crimes, which constitutes surrender; that he actively returned the money, and that he is a first offender and an occasional offender, are well-founded and will be adopted. As for the defense counsel’s opinion that Wang [M] had meritorious performance and that it is recommended he be sentenced to criminal detention and given a suspended sentence, after investigation it was found that Wang [M] introduced his unit to bribe national officials with the 1.5 million yuan, and the circumstances are serious. He also received a kickback fee of 0.5 million yuan. Combining the documentary evidence such as the process of surrender and the letters for transferring problem-line clues and transferring letters, and the testimony of witness Li [M], it can confirm that Wang [M], while being taken by supervisory personnel for questioning, voluntarily confessed the facts of his crimes. His statements came later than Li [M]’s testimony. Moreover, in this case, the problem-line clues were discovered by the supervisory authorities while handling the related bribery and bribery-receiving case concerning this matter. In bribery crimes, there is an internal connection between the acceptance of bribes and the acts of offering bribes and introducing bribery. In this case, Wang [M]’s statements are limited to confessing the criminal facts of his own introducing bribery; they should not be recognized as meritorious performance.

In addition, Wang [M] has voluntarily signed the plea and sentencing agreement (admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment). The prosecution’s sentencing recommendation toward Wang [M] is not improper; therefore, that defense opinion cannot be成立 and will not be adopted.

Before being prosecuted, Wang [M] voluntarily confessed the facts of his crimes, which can mitigate or exempt punishment. After committing the offense, Wang [M] voluntarily surrendered and truthfully confessed his crimes; this constitutes surrender, and he may be given a lighter punishment or exempted from punishment. Wang [M] voluntarily admitted guilt and accepted punishment, which allows for a lenient handling. If Wang [M] returned all illegal proceeds, the court may determine that punishment should be lighter. Wang [M]’s surrender overlaps in sentencing circumstances with the circumstance that, before being prosecuted, he voluntarily confessed the facts of his crimes. Under the principle of what is favorable to the defendant, the court chooses to apply the provisions of Article 392, Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China. The statutory circumstances for Wang [M] to be mitigated or exempted from punishment, as well as the discretionary leniency circumstances, as mentioned above, are comprehensively considered when determining sentencing. Based on Wang [M]’s crime circumstances and his表现 of remorse, the court determines that Wang [M] meets the conditions for applying a suspended sentence, and decides to apply a suspended sentence to Wang [M]. The prosecution’s sentencing recommendation is appropriate.

Pursuant to Article 392, Article 64, Article 72 (Paragraph 1 and Paragraph 3), Article 73 (Paragraph 2 and Paragraph 3) of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, and Article 15, Article 188 (Paragraph 1), and Article 201 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, the judgment is as follows:

I. Wang [M] commits the crime of introducing bribery. He is sentenced to eight months of fixed-term imprisonment, with a suspended sentence for one year, and is also fined RMB 150,000;

II. The RMB 500k of illegal proceeds that Wang [M] has returned and that have not been transferred are to be remitted to the national treasury by the supervisory authority in accordance with law.

A massive amount of news and precise analysis are available in the Sina Finance App